Windows 7 To Include "Windows XP Mode" 364
Z80xxc! writes "Paul Thurrott's WinSuperSite reports that Windows 7 will include a built-in virtual machine with a fully licensed copy of Windows XP Professional SP3. The VM runs in a modified version of Virtual PC, and applications running in the VM can interact directly with the host operating system as if they were running on the Windows 7 installation itself. While details are scarce for now, it looks as if this feature will only be available as a (free) addon for Professional, Enterprise and Ultimate editions of Windows 7. Also, a processor supporting hardware virtualization will be required, indicating that this is perhaps aimed more at power users and corporate users, rather than consumers. Microsoft confirmed the feature last night."
Re:And who needs it most? (Score:5, Informative)
I think companies are more likely to depend on old software that runs only on XP. So they target the correct users indeed.
Most non-corporate users only use programs to browse the tubes, print documents, send email and view photo's, nothing that depends on XP :)
Re:This has been a long time coming (Score:4, Informative)
they can- for the first time - take the backwards compatibility crap out of Windows and concentrate on providing a stable OS.
No, they can't. The vast majority of Windows 7 users will be running one of the Home editions, which aren't going to have this "Virtual XP" mode. RTFA or just the summary.
Re:This has been a long time coming (Score:4, Informative)
The CPU transitions were handled at a much lower-level - the CPU was emulated, but not the OS, so even emulated software was running in the native OS. Apart from the performance drop, running apps in Rosetta (the PPC emulator) is pretty seamless; you can try it out by choosing an app, File->Get Info, then checking the 'Open in Rosetta' checkbox.
But yeah, the OS9->OSX transition did something similar to what Microsoft's describing. I only hope that Microsoft manage it a bit more gracefully than Apple did, 'cos that had serious usability problems and was a pretty jarring experience overall.
Re:And who needs it most? (Score:3, Informative)
For those who don't know: BG Trilogy [shsforums.net] is a method of importing the original BG assets into BG2.
It's possible to do that and add a boatload of other mods (like Dark side of the Sword Coast) to create an epic, continuous game that goes from the escape from Candlekeep all the way through to the Throne of Bhall.
Re:x64 Editions (Score:1, Informative)
There's no such thing as "XP SP3 x64." XP x64 is actually Server 2003 built with a client configuration, and not XP. In other words, it shares service packs with 2003.
But no, it's not going to include any 64-bit guest OS. Why would it, all the legacy software people care about is 32-bit.
Re:I knew it! (Score:3, Informative)
Classic wasn't precisely a VM in the normal sense, though, but rather more of an abstraction layer. Most PowerPC code was just run native and unchanged, and there was simply an abstraction layer that turned all the classic system calls (and some old hardware calls, admittedly) into modern equivalents.
The benefit of which was that you did not take nearly the performance hit you would for virtualizing the entire computer a'la a traditional VM, but the downside was that Classic would no longer work once Macs made the switch to Intel architectures because you weren't virtualizing hardware at all, just abstracting the system APIs into newer calls.
Which is why Classic is no longer in Mac OS X as of Leopard, now that all newer Macs are Intel-based. There's still true VM based equivalents for Intel machines, though, like Sheepshaver.
Apple called from the year 2000 (Score:5, Informative)
Apple called from the year 2000 and wants their legacy transition strategy back... but hey it did work, so I say go for it Microsoft.
BTW virtualization need not be in a window. When Apple provided OS 9 aka "Classic" support they didn't make the apps second class citizens in any way relevant to getting work done. Sure they were running in emulated mode and were not as fast as they could be but they had access to all peripherals, etc.
Modern virtualization allows for way better performance, full access to all hardware and as importantly can still be sandboxed.
They should hide all the virtualization aspects though and just let the apps open like they are regular apps with maybe a title bar note saying "(Windows XP) or something so there is a clue when an app gets updated to full native capabilities (the note will go away.
When Mac OS did this transition it was actually quite exciting (though also frustrating) as I would be on the look-out for the OSX native version of some software to come out.... then we got to do it again when the Intel binaries came out...
Anyways, if Microsoft does it right it will be transparent and will allow them to finally do away with the legacy support roadmap. This XP virtual mode will be there as long as it takes for companies to move their apps over to 64 bit Windows 7/8 whatever compatibility.
Re:Requested by the Military (Score:5, Informative)
I hope this causes them to upgrade their VirtualPC as it doesn't support USB devices currently.
Re:Back(ass)wards Compatibility. (Score:1, Informative)
When a company says "we're no longer going to support Windows 3x or Win9x, they should MEAN IT. NO support for the software.
They'd have to be insane to do that. Only an insane OS vendor would get incompatible with the largest collection of software in the history of computing.
IBM seems to be able to move forward without breaking APIs, and their mainframe systems were first introduced in the late '60s. Sun also has an ABI guarantee system [sun.com] for Solaris.
Re:I knew it! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:And who needs it most? (Score:3, Informative)
In the future all CPU's will have hardware virtualization anyway, we're talking about a future OS on future computers here, non power users of the near future will have a CPU that is more powerful than a CPU of today and with hardware virtualization.
As far as I know everything including and after the AMD Athlon X2 and Intel Core 2 processors support that already. They're certainly fast enough too.
Re:I knew it! (Score:4, Informative)
Carbon is the API abstraction layer; Classic was very much a VM - you even got to watch MacOS 9 boot in a window prior to any Classic application being loaded.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classic_(Mac_OS_X)
Classic was only a VM and not an emulator, which is why the Intel chips are not supported.
Re:Requested by the Military (Score:3, Informative)
According to screenshots, XPM will support USB passthrough.
Re:Mod parent up (Score:1, Informative)
Oh well, what a surprise, a geek buys a cpu with nice features.
On the other and every product line of intel contains at least one product without hardware virtualization. These processors are cheaper than their relatives with hardware virtualization and thus more consumers that don't explicitly look for that have a good chance of buying one.
Re:This is a desperation measure aimed at IT guys (Score:0, Informative)
I work for a roughly Fortune 100 - 200 company. Publicly traded, you've all heard of it.
They announced a few months ago that we would be migrating to Windows 7 from XP some time in the next 18 months.
Re:And who needs it most? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Had that for awhile now... (Score:2, Informative)
A rootkit in a VM could be used as a platform for launching attacks on nearby nodes, behind whatever firewall may be in place.
Re:What about win 9x or even dos vm in windows 7 (Score:3, Informative)
cbhacking, If your going to mock someone please properly read what they are saying.
Of course Win 9x didnt have a secure mode, Win XP professional had a more secure mode where it could be locked down at the registry level to prevent users modifying folders.
Many win 9x programs cant be run in XP because of that, now if Win 7 created a Win 9x sandbox mode(including dos and hardware emulation) that would be a crucial and desirable feature for K-12 education.